DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 15-19, 25, 27-28 and 31 in the reply filed on September 15, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-9, 12 and 14 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 15-16, 18-19, 25, 27 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Preisler (WO 2004/011337 A2) IDS 10/08/2023. Evidence provided by Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hybrid. Accessed 23 Oct. 2025.
Regarding Claim 15, Preisler anticipates a method of manufacturing a hybrid panel (abs p. 1 ll. 9-18 where a panel with a composite structure which can be considered as synonymous with “hybrid” as “something heterogeneous in origin or composition: Composite - considered a synonym (See Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary – citation above), comprising:
a. providing a panel (Fig. 1 p.6 ll. 1-3 reinforced composite pallet assembly of the sandwich-type have a cellular core is provided);
b. framing said panel with enough material to change a geometry on at least a part of said panel (Fig. 1 abs, p. 8 l. 26-p. 9 l. 3 plurality of supports including molded-in features - pockets, grooves and/or ribs on retaining walls; assembly – 10 includes at least one support, generally indicated at – 22, for supporting the deck – 12 at the predetermined places against the reinforcing slats – 16 so that tines can lift and support the pallet - assembly – 10 at the tine-engaging skin – 20, where the dimensions inherently change)
Regarding Claims 16 and 18, Preisler, anticipates all the limitations of claim 15 and further anticipates that the said change a geometry comprises providing a structural function with said change and wherein said framing said panel further comprises providing a frame comprising functional elements to be added to said panel.(Fig. 1 p. 6 ll. 1-3 plurality of supports support the deck and reinforcing slats may be received and retained within a plurality of cavities formed between the tine-engaging skin and the plurality of supports)...
Regarding Claim 19, Preisler anticipates all the limitations of claim 15 and further anticipates, that the said providing a panel of the method comprises one or more of – examiner has chosen a) the first alternative:
a. providing a panel comprising a honeycomb core (Figs 1, 2 p. 12 ll. 1-3 each of the cellular cores – 18 and 38 of the decks – 12 and 30 respectively, has an open-celled structure of the tubular or honeycomb cell type), a first protecting layer on a first side of said honeycomb and a second protecting layer on a second side of said honeycomb core (Fig. 1 p. 6 ll. 3-7 p. 8 ll. 19-22 load-bearing skin – 14 cellular core – 18 tine-engaging skin – 20) ;
Regarding Claim 25, Preisler anticipates all the limitations of claim 15 and further anticipates said material is one or more of thermoplastic material and recycled thermoplastic material (Fig. 1 p. 12 ll. 13-15 where in at least one embodiment spaced supports – 22 support deck – 12 and are made of a thermoplastics material, in this way, substantially th entire pallet assembly – 10 is recyclable).
Regarding Claim 27, Preisler anticipates all the limitations of claim 15 and further anticipates said framing said panel comprises attaching said frame to said panel by one or more of overmoulding process, gluing processes, welding processes, snapping processes, riveting processes and screwing processes (Fig. 1 p. 12 ll. 15-17 supports – 22 are preferably hollow thermoplastic feet which are hotplate welded or bonded to the skins – 20 and 32).
Regarding Claim 31, Preisler anticipates all the limitations of claim 15 and further anticipates a surface of said hybrid panel is one or more of flat and without indentations or protrusions (Fig. 1 p. 8 ll. 18-19 assembly – 10 includes a substantially flat deck, generally indicated at – 12, having front, back and side edges – 13).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 17 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Preisler (WO 2004/011337 A2) IDS 10/08/2023.
Regarding Claim 17, Preisler anticipates all the limitations of claim 15 and while Preisler discloses in its method that the said enough material comprises a framing portion (Fig. 1 p. 8 l 26-p. 9 l.3 assembly – 10 also includes at least one support, generally indicated at 22, for supporting the deck – 12 at the predetermined places against the reinforcing slats – 16), Preisler does not disclose that this framing portion is of at least 2mm thickness.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for the method to comprise framing the said panel with enough material such that the framing portion provides a thickness of at least 2 mm. since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
One would have been motivated to use this range of at least 2 mm thickness because this is dependent on the load and application of the materials and Preisler discloses that the protecting layers must have material properties including thickness which generally should not exceed 30 mm while the honeycomb blocks are also cut to required thicknesses of typically 5 and 30 mm (p. 9 ll. 15-16; p. 12 ll. 11-12).
Regarding Claim 28, Preisler anticipates all the limitations of claim 15 and while Preisler discloses in its method that the said hybrid panel is characterized by being ultra-light weight (abs, p. 1 ll. 13-14) and that conventional panels (inferring non-hybrid) are constructed having a cellular core with low strength characteristics (p. 1 ll. 15-18) while sandwich-type composite structures have a cellular core with strength characteristics sufficient to enable mechanical structures subjected to large stresses to be reinforced structurally without making them too heavy (p. 2 ll. 22-24), Preisler does not disclose that it’s method produces a hybrid panel that is: characterized by one or more of the following:
a. lighter from about 5% to about 10% than a non-hybrid panel;
b. stronger from about 30% to about 60% than a non-hybrid panel;
c. configured to carry from about 5% to about 10% more load than a non-hybrid panel.
However, because Preisler discloses and considers that at least light weight and strength are result effective variables it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use a range of the hybrid panel characteristic of lighter from about 5% to about 10% than a non-hybrid panel and stronger from about 30% to about 60% than a non-hybrid panel since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
One would have been motivated to use these ranges because this enables these hybrid panels to be subjected to large stresses without making them too heavy since they are in common use in shipbuilding, aircraft construction, and rail vehicle construction (p. 2 ll. 22-26).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAYNE K. SWIER whose telephone number is (571)272-4598. The examiner can normally be reached M-F generally 8:30 am - 5:30 pm PST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abbas Rashid can be reached at 571-270-7457. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WAYNE K. SWIER/Examiner, Art Unit 1748
/Abbas Rashid/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1748